Checking DL-Lite modularity with QBF solvers

Inspired by epistemic entrenchment contraction function, we first rank all the DL-Lite R TBox axioms such that the higher up in the ranking the more preferred an ax- iom is.. As

A consideration around the use of number restrictions (qualified or unqualified) regards their semantics: on the DL side, number restrictions, in- tended for possible infinite

We consider stan- dard decision problems associated to logic-based abduction: (i) existence of an expla- nation, (ii) recognition of a given ABox as being an explanation, and

Also, we present polynomial time algorithms for the evolution of the instance level knowledge bases expressed in DL-Lite A,id , which the most expressive Description Logics of

These considerations lead us to TDLs based on DL-Lite N bool and DL-Lite N core and interpreted over the flow of time ( Z , <), in which (1) the future and past temporal

We show that for DL−Lite H core , DL−Lite H krom and DL−Lite N horn TBoxes MinAs are efficiently enumerable with polynomial delay, but for DL−Lite bool they cannot be enumerated

To address these needs, the DL-Lite family of description logics has been proposed and investi- gated in [6–8, 16], with the aim of identifying a class of DLs that could capture

(The inequality constraints do not affect the complexity.) In the presence of functionality con- straints, dropping the UNA increases the combined complexity of satisfiability